DETAILED ACTION
Applicants' arguments, filed 07/01/2026, have been fully considered. Rejections and/or objections not reiterated from previous office actions are hereby withdrawn. The following rejections and/or objections are either reiterated or newly applied. They constitute the complete set presently being applied to the instant application.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
The instant application claims domestic priority to PRO 63/032,014 filed 05/29/2020 and PRO 63/116,254 filed 11/20/2020. The instant application is a 371 of PCT/US2021/034511 filed 05/27/2021.
Claim Interpretation
With regards to the amendment to instant claim 1 “wherein the antimicrobial film is present as a coating on a high-touch surface”, the term is considered intended use of the antimicrobial film and is therefore not further limiting.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
A) Claims 1, 4-5, 15, 26, 30, 34, 47, and 141 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tong et al (US Patent No. 10,137,394B2).
Tong recites a filtration barrier with a barrier layer and a substrate layer (Tong at claim 14). Tong teaches wherein the substrate layer is made of polymers consisting of polyurethane with a layer size of 1 to 10 microns (Tong at column 4). Tong teaches that the barrier layer can be polymers other than CA and PEO, and instead can be polyurethane (Tong at column 7). Tong teaches that the barrier layer can have a pore size of 100 to 10,000nm (aka 0.1 microns to 10 microns) (Tong at column 1). Tong teaches that the barrier layer may 5 to 100 microns (Tong at column 4). Tong further teaches that the barrier layer includes a biocide which may be silver nanoparticles or copper oxide (Tong at column 9). Tong recites wherein the substrate layer may be a polycarbonate surface (Tong at column 4).
Tong differs from the instant claims in this rejection insofar as it does not teach the combination of the instantly recited components with sufficient specificity for anticipation. Tong teaches the components of the instant recited composition and uses each component of their established function in the art but does not explicitly combine the components together into a single embodiment or a preferred composition. However, given the disclosure of each component individually, it would have been prima facie obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at a time prior to the filing of the present patent application and following the teachings of Tong to have selected and combined known components for their established functions with predictable results. MPEP §2143 and §2144.06(I).
Regarding instant claim 1, Tong recites a filtration barrier with a barrier layer and a substrate layer (Tong at claim 14). Tong teaches that the barrier layer can be polymers other than CA and PEO, and instead can be polyurethane (Tong at column 7). Tong teaches that the barrier layer can have a pore size of 100 to 10,000nm (aka 0.1 microns to 10 microns) (Tong at column 1), which overlaps the instantly claimed range of 1 micron to 50 microns. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP§2144.05(I). Tong further teaches that the barrier layer includes a biocide which may be silver nanoparticles or copper oxide (Tong at column 9). Tong recites wherein the substrate layer may be a polycarbonate surface (Tong at column 4).
Regarding instant claim 4, Tong further teaches that the barrier layer includes a biocide which may be silver nanoparticles or copper oxide (Tong at column 9).
Regarding instant claim 5, Tong further teaches that the barrier layer includes a biocide which may be silver nanoparticles or copper oxide (Tong at column 9).
Regarding instant claim 15, Tong recites a filtration barrier with a barrier layer and a substrate layer (Tong at claim 14). Tong teaches wherein the substrate layer is made of polymers consisting of polyurethane with a layer size of 1 to 10 microns (Tong at column 4). Tong teaches that the barrier layer can be polymers other than CA and PEO, and instead can be polyurethane (Tong at column 7). Tong further teaches that the barrier layer includes a biocide which may be silver nanoparticles or copper oxide (Tong at column 9).
Regarding instant claim 26, Tong teaches a composition with substantially similar components to the instantly claimed invention as such it would have sustainably the same inherent properties including hydrophobicity. See MPEP 2112.01(II).
Regarding instant claim 30, Tong teaches wherein the substrate layer is made of polymers consisting of polyurethane with a layer size of 1 to 10 microns (Tong at column 4), which overlaps the instantly claimed range of 5 to 100 microns. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP§2144.05(I).
Regarding instant claim 34, Tong teaches wherein the substrate layer is made of polymers consisting of polyurethane with a layer size of 1 to 10 microns (Tong at column 4). Tong teaches that the barrier layer can be polymers other than CA and PEO, and instead can be polyurethane (Tong at column 7). Tong teaches that the barrier layer can have a pore size of 100 to 10,000nm (aka 0.1 microns to 10 microns) (Tong at column 1). A layer with this size of layer and this pore size is capable of a pore volume of 50% to 70% of the film volume. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP§2144.05(I).
Regarding instant claim 47, Tong teaches a composition with substantially similar components to the instantly claimed invention as such it would have sustainably the same inherent properties including recyclability. See MPEP 2112.01(II).
Regarding instant claim 141, Tong recites a filtration barrier with a barrier layer and a substrate layer (Tong at claim 14).
B) Claims 6, 134, and 136-137 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tong et al (US Patent No. 10,137,394B2) as applied to claim 1, 4-5, 15, 26,30, 34, 47, and 141 above, and further in view of Hasegawa et al. (US Application Publication 20190037850A1).
Tong recites a filtration barrier with a barrier layer and a substrate layer (Tong at claim 14). Tong teaches wherein the substrate layer is made of polymers consisting of polyurethane with a size of 1 to 10 microns (Tong at column 4). Tong teaches that the barrier layer can be polymers other than CA and PEO, and instead can be polyurethane (Tong at column 7). Tong teaches that the barrier layer can have a pore size of 100 to 10,000nm (aka 0.1 microns to 10 microns) (Tong at column 1). Tong teaches that the barrier layer may 5 to 100 microns (Tong at column 4). Tong further teaches that the barrier layer includes a biocide which may be silver nanoparticles or copper oxide (Tong at column 9). Tong recites wherein the substrate layer may be a polycarbonate surface (Tong at column 4).
The teachings of Tong differ from the instantly claimed invention insofar as it does not specifically teach a size for the silver nanoparticles or copper oxide. The teachings of Hasegawa cure this deficit.
Hasegawa recites an antibacterial film, comprising: antibacterial agent particles containing a metal; and at least one selected from the group consisting of a silicate-based compound and a thermoplastic resin having a minimum film-forming temperature of 0° C. to 35° C., the antibacterial film having an average film thickness of 0.05 to 1 μm, wherein the antibacterial agent particles containing a metal have the maximum value of frequency at a particle size of 0.1 μm or greater and less than 1 μm in a volume-based particle size distribution, the content of particles having a particle size of 1 μm or greater is 5% to 50% by volume, and the difference between the maximum value and the minimum value of the film thickness is 0.1 μm or greater (Hasegawa at claim 15). Hasegawa recites wherein the antibacterial agent particles containing a metal further have a local maximum value of frequency at a particle size of 1 μm or greater in the particle size distribution (Hasegawa at claim 17). Hasegawa recite wherein the antibacterial agent particles containing a metal are metal-supported carriers each including a carrier and a metal supported on the carrier (Hasegawa at claim 18). Hasegawa recites example 15 which is a polyurethane film with silver nanoparticles. While 580 g of ethanol was stirred in a container, 65 g of a thermoplastic resin having a minimum film-forming temperature of 28° C. (urethane resin, “SUPERFLEX (registered trademark) 860” manufactured by Dai-ichi Kogyo Seiyaku Co., Ltd., diluted with pure water; solid content concentration 40% by mass), 30 g of a nonionic surfactant (“EMALEX 715” manufactured by Nihon Emulsion Co., Ltd., diluted with pure water; solid content concentration 0.5% by mass), 10 g of an anionic surfactant (sodium di(2-ethylhexyl)sulfosuccinate, diluted with pure water; solid content concentration 0.2% by mass), 40 g of inorganic microparticles (silica particles, “SNOWTEX O-33” manufactured by Nissan Chemical Industries, Ltd., diluted with pure water; solid content concentration: 33% by mass), and 3.6 g of a dispersant (“DISPERBYK (registered trademark)-180” manufactured by BYK Chemie GmbH) were introduced in sequence into the container. Subsequently, antibacterial agent particles obtained by blending 1.08 g of antibacterial agent particles (silver-supported glass, diluted with ethanol; solid content concentration 40% by mass) having a mode diameter of 0.4 μm and having the content of particles having a particle size of 1 μm or greater adjusted to 0% by volume, and 0.12 g of antibacterial agent particles (silver-supported glass, diluted with ethanol; solid content concentration 40% by mass) having a mode diameter of 1.9 μm and having the content of particles having a particle size of 1 μm or greater adjusted to 86% by volume, were added to the container, and the mixture was stirred for 20 minutes. Thus, antibacterial composition A-15 was obtained. (Hasegawa at [0216]). Next, antibacterial film A-15-1 (average film thickness: 0.2 μm) and antibacterial film A-15-2 (average film thickness: 0.8 μm) were obtained by the bar coating method, using antibacterial composition A-15. (Hasegawa at [0217]). Next, antibacterial film A-15-3 (average film thickness: 0.3 μm) was obtained by the wiping method, using antibacterial composition A-15. The maximum value of film thickness of antibacterial film A-15-3 was 0.5 μm, and the film thickness difference was 0.4 μm. (Hasegawa at [0218]). The blended antibacterial agent particles had a mode diameter of 0.4 μm and a local maximum value frequency particle size of 1.9 μm. Furthermore, the content of particles having a particle size of 1 μm or greater was 9% by volume. Hasegawa teaches the use of oxides having at least one element selected from Ti, Nb, Ta, or V, such as TiO2, ZnO, SrTiO3, CdS, GaP, InP, GaAs, BaTiO3, BaTiO4, BaTi4O9, K2NbO3, Nb2O5, Fe2O3, Ta2O5, K3Ta3Si2O3, WO3, SnO2, Bi2O3, BiVO4, NiO, Cu2O, SiC, MoS2, InPb, RuO2, CeO2, and Ta3N5. Among them, it is preferable that the metal oxide contains at least one metal atom selected from the group consisting of Zn, Ti, Ni, W, Cu, Sn, Fe, Sr, and Bi (Hasegawa at [0091]). Hasegawa teaches that the film may be used in facilities such as electronic instruments and medical instruments; and construction materials such as flooring, walls, and banisters. The facilities and the like mentioned above may have already been installed and may have already been operated (Hasegawa at [0035]). These structures likely have complicated shape (for example, having concavities and convexities), the film thickness of the antibacterial film is more likely to become non-uniform which the film of Hasegawa is meant to address (Hasegawa at [0035-0039]).
Hasegawa differ from the instant claims in this rejection insofar as it does not teach a pore size for its polyurethane film. The teachings of Tong et al. cure this deficit.
It would have been prima facie obvious to have combined the copper oxide and silver nanoparticles of Tong with the copper oxide and silver nanoparticles of Hasegawa for the predictable result of a polyurethane with a copper oxide or silver nanoparticle. See MPEP 2144.06(I). It would be obvious to have used the more specific copper oxide taught by Hasegawa in the composition of Tong for its intended purpose as a copper oxide on a film. See MPEP 2144.07.
Regarding instant claim 6, Hasegawa recites example 15 which comprises antibacterial agent particles (silver-supported glass, diluted with ethanol; solid content concentration 40% by mass) having a mode diameter of 1.9 μm and having the content of particles having a particle size of 1 μm or greater (Hasegawa at example 15).
Regarding instant claim 134, Hasegawa teaches that the composition uses silicas and glass in their film for the benefit of transparency (Hasegawa at [0045]). Hasegawa teaches a composition with substantially similar components to the instantly claimed invention as such it would have sustainably the same inherent properties including opacity. See MPEP 2112.01(II).
Regarding instant claim 136, Hasegawa recites example 15 which is a polyurethane film with silver nanoparticles (Hasegawa at example 15). Hasegawa teaches that the film may be used in facilities such as electronic instruments and medical instruments; and construction materials such as flooring, walls, and banisters. The facilities and the like mentioned above may have already been installed and may have already been operated (Hasegawa at [0035]).
Regarding instant claim 137, Hasegawa teaches that the composition can be applied to natural and synthetic cloth or fiber (Hasegawa at [0153-0156]). Hasegawa teaches that the film may be used in facilities such as electronic instruments and medical instruments; and construction materials such as flooring, walls, and banisters. The facilities and the like mentioned above may have already been installed and may have already been operated (Hasegawa at [0035]).
C) Claims 136-137 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tong et al (US Patent No. 10,137,394B2) as applied to claim 1, 4-5, 15, 26,30, 34, 47, and 141 above, and further in view of Fujimori et al. (US Patent Application Publication 20110262513A1).
The teachings of Tong are discussed above.
The teachings of Tong differ from the instant invention insofar as they do not specifically teach what the filter barrier is used as. The teachings of Fujimori cure this deficit.
Fujimori recites an antiviral member, comprising: a substrate; univalent copper compound particles; and a group of inorganic particles which are for supporting the univalent copper compound particles on the substrate and which have a silane monomer chemically bonded to a surface thereof, wherein the inorganic particles having the silane monomer on the surface thereof are bonded to each other via chemical bonds formed between the silane monomers provided on the surface of the inorganic particles, and the group of inorganic particles are bonded to the substrate due to the chemical bonds between the silane monomers on the surface of the inorganic particles and the substrate, whereby the group of inorganic particles forms spaces for supporting the univalent copper compound particles (Fujimori at claim 1). Fujimori recites wherein the univalent copper compound particles are formed of at least one kind selected from the group consisting of CuCl, CuCH3COO, CuI, CuBr, Cu2O, CuOH, Cu2S, CuCN, and CuSCN (Fujimori at claim 7). Fujimori teaches the use of polyurethane as a substrate (Fujimori at [0055-056]). Fujimori teaches examples of the fibrous structure, which is an example of the substrate 1 according to the present embodiment, include woven and nonwoven fabrics. Specific applied examples thereof include masks, air-conditioner filters, air purifier filters, vacuum cleaner filters, ventilation fan filters, automotive filters, air-conditioner filters, clothing, bedding, screen door nets, poultry house nets, and mosquito nets (Fujimori at [0061]). Fujimori teaches that it is preferred that the copper particles have an average particle size of 500 μm or less (Fujimori at [0026]). Fujimori teaches that a film may have a thickness of 125µm (Fujimori at [0098]). Fujimori teaches the sheet or film on which the univalent copper compound particles 2 having an antiviral activity are supported can be utilized in various fields, for example, wallpapers, windows, blinds, interior materials used in buildings such as a hospital, interior materials in a train, automobile and the like, automotive sheets, blinds, chairs, sofas, equipment used in handling viruses, and construction materials such as doors, ceiling panels, floor boards, and windows (Fujimori at [0065]).
Fujimori differs from the instant claims in this rejection insofar as it does not teach the pore size of its polyurethane films. The teachings of Tong cure this deficit.
Regarding instant claim 136, Fujimori teaches examples of the fibrous structure, which is an example of the substrate 1 according to the present embodiment, include woven and nonwoven fabrics. Specific applied examples thereof include masks, air-conditioner filters, air purifier filters, vacuum cleaner filters, ventilation fan filters, automotive filters, air-conditioner filters, clothing, bedding, screen door nets, poultry house nets, and mosquito nets (Fujimori at [0061]). Fujimori teaches the sheet or film on which the univalent copper compound particles 2 having an antiviral activity are supported can be utilized in various fields, for example, wallpapers, windows, blinds, interior materials used in buildings such as a hospital, interior materials in a train, automobile and the like, automotive sheets, blinds, chairs, sofas, equipment used in handling viruses, and construction materials such as doors, ceiling panels, floor boards, and windows (Fujimori at [0065]).
Regarding instant claim 137, Fujimori teaches examples of the fibrous structure, which is an example of the substrate 1 according to the present embodiment, include woven and nonwoven fabrics. Specific applied examples thereof include masks, air-conditioner filters, air purifier filters, vacuum cleaner filters, ventilation fan filters, automotive filters, air-conditioner filters, clothing, bedding, screen door nets, poultry house nets, and mosquito nets (Fujimori at [0061]). Fujimori teaches the sheet or film on which the univalent copper compound particles 2 having an antiviral activity are supported can be utilized in various fields, for example, wallpapers, windows, blinds, interior materials used in buildings such as a hospital, interior materials in a train, automobile and the like, automotive sheets, blinds, chairs, sofas, equipment used in handling viruses, and construction materials such as doors, ceiling panels, floor boards, and windows (Fujimori at [0065]).
C) Claims 1, 4, 14, 16-17, 26, 30, 34, 47, and 136 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Freeman et al. (US Patent Application Publication 20100059433A1) in view of Tong et al (US Patent No. 10,137,394B2).
Freeman recites a method of depositing a coating material to reduce or prevent biofilm formation on a surface comprising the steps of: adding a dopamine coating material to a liquid solvent to form a solution mixture; adjusting a pH of the solution mixture to 8, 9, or 10; dissolving the dopamine coating material in the liquid solvent; and contacting the solution mixture with one or more surfaces to form a dopamine coating on the surface to reduce biofilm formation (Freeman at claim 1). Freeman recites wherein the dopamine coating is polydopamine (Freeman at claim 3). Freeman recites wherein the surface comprises a membrane surface, a bead, a film, a tube, a sheet, a thread, a suture, a gauze, a bandage, an adhesive bandage, a vessel, a container, a cistern, a filter, a membrane, a coating, a paint, a solution, a polymer and combinations thereof (Freeman at claim 6). Freeman recites wherein the dopamine coating further comprises silver, zinc, copper, metal ions, alloy ions, nanoparticles, metal nanoparticles, inorganic molecules or combinations thereof (Freeman at claim 9).
Freeman teaches that the polydopamine for a variety of time from 1 to 120 minutes to control the deposition of polydopamine on the substrate (Freeman at [0043). Freeman also teaches a variety of substrates including a membrane surface, a bead, a film, a tube, a sheet, a thread, a suture, a gauze, a bandage, an adhesive bandage, a vessel, a container, a cistern, a filter, a membrane, a coating, a paint, a solution, a polymer and combinations thereof (Freeman at claim 6). As such one of ordinary skill in the art would have been able to optimize the pore size of the film in order to produce the desired density of film with each specific substrate to provide effective antifouling.
Freeman teaches a deposition method used to treat membranes with dopamine to form polydopamine on the membrane surface and in the case of porous membranes, inside the membrane pores. This method is advantageous over other modifications because of its ease of applicability to virtually any membrane support. Polydopamine nonspecifically adheres to virtually any surface with which it comes into contact (Freeman at [0038]).
Freeman differs from the instant claims in this rejection insofar as it does not teach pore size for its films. The teachings of Tong cure this deficit.
The teachings of Tong are discussed above.
The teachings of Tong differ from that of Freeman insofar as they do not disclose the use of polydopamine.
It would be prima facie obvious to have used the pore size of Tong for the film of Freeman for the benefits of pore size to particle flow taught in Tong. See MPEP 2144.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art have the substrate or the polyurethane of Tong coated with the polydopamine of Freeman for the benefit of the anti-fouling properties disclosed in Freeman. As such, the polydopamine of Freeman would have a similar pore size to that of Tong.
Regarding instant claim 1, Freeman recites wherein the dopamine coating is polydopamine (Freeman at claim 3). Freeman recites wherein the dopamine coating further comprises silver, zinc, copper, metal ions, alloy ions, nanoparticles, metal nanoparticles, inorganic molecules or combinations thereof (Freeman at claim 9).
Regarding instant claim 4, Freeman recites wherein the dopamine coating is polydopamine (Freeman at claim 3). Freeman recites wherein the dopamine coating further comprises silver, zinc, copper, metal ions, alloy ions, nanoparticles, metal nanoparticles, inorganic molecules or combinations thereof (Freeman at claim 9).
Regarding instant claim 14, Freeman teaches the use of norepinephrine (Freeman at [0094]).
Regarding instant claims 16-17, Freeman recites wherein the dopamine coating is polydopamine (Freeman at claim 3). Freeman recites wherein the dopamine coating further comprises silver, zinc, copper, metal ions, alloy ions, nanoparticles, metal nanoparticles, inorganic molecules or combinations thereof (Freeman at claim 9).
Regarding instant claim 26, Freeman teaches a composition with substantially similar components to the instantly claimed invention as such it would have sustainably the same inherent properties including hydrophobicity. See MPEP 2112.01(II).
Regarding instant claim 30, Freeman teaches that the polydopamine for a variety of time from 1 to 120 minutes to control the deposition of polydopamine on the substrate (Freeman at [0043). Freeman also teaches a variety of substrates including a membrane surface, a bead, a film, a tube, a sheet, a thread, a suture, a gauze, a bandage, an adhesive bandage, a vessel, a container, a cistern, a filter, a membrane, a coating, a paint, a solution, a polymer and combinations thereof (Freeman at claim 6). As such one of ordinary skill in the art would have been able to optimize the thickness of the film in order to produce the desired thickness of polydopamine for each specific substrate to provide adequate antifouling.
Regarding instant claim 34, Freeman teaches that the polydopamine for a variety of time from 1 to 120 minutes to control the deposition of polydopamine on the substrate (Freeman at [0043). Freeman also teaches a variety of substrates including a membrane surface, a bead, a film, a tube, a sheet, a thread, a suture, a gauze, a bandage, an adhesive bandage, a vessel, a container, a cistern, a filter, a membrane, a coating, a paint, a solution, a polymer and combinations thereof (Freeman at claim 6). As such one of ordinary skill in the art would have been able to optimize the pore volume of the film in order to produce the desired density of film with each specific substrate to provide effective antifouling.
Regarding instant claim 47, Freeman teaches a composition with substantially similar components to the instantly claimed invention as such it would have sustainably the same inherent properties including recyclability. See MPEP 2112.01(II).
Regarding instant claim 136, Freeman also teaches a variety of substrates including a membrane surface, a bead, a film, a tube, a sheet, a thread, a suture, a gauze, a bandage, an adhesive bandage, a vessel, a container, a cistern, a filter, a membrane, a coating, a paint, a solution, a polymer and combinations thereof (Freeman at claim 6).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/01/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Tong teaches a filter should therefore the obviousness rejections in view of Tong should be withdrawn.
The Examiner does not agree. See the claim interpretation supra. See the obviousness rejection supra. Tong recites wherein the substrate layer may be a polycarbonate surface (Tong at column 4). A polycarbonate surface is one of the listed high touch articles of instant claim 137. Therefore, Tong recites the application of the polyurethane coating to a high touch article polycarbonate surface. Furthermore, filters are present in medical equipment, filter often need to be touched for installation or replacement and it is critical that the filters not introduce microbes from their installation or handling into the patient space. As such, Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive and the obviousness rejection is maintained.
Applicant argues that Freeman does not teach a pore size and that the pore size of Tong would not be useful to Freeman as Freeman forms films in a different manner than Tong. As such, the obviousness rejections in view of Freeman should be withdrawn.
The Examiner does not agree. Freeman recites a method of depositing a coating material to reduce or prevent biofilm formation on a surface comprising the steps of: adding a dopamine coating material to a liquid solvent to form a solution mixture; adjusting a pH of the solution mixture to 8, 9, or 10; dissolving the dopamine coating material in the liquid solvent; and contacting the solution mixture with one or more surfaces to form a dopamine coating on the surface to reduce biofilm formation (Freeman at claim 1). Freeman recites wherein the dopamine coating is polydopamine (Freeman at claim 3). Freeman recites wherein the surface comprises a membrane surface, a bead, a film, a tube, a sheet, a thread, a suture, a gauze, a bandage, an adhesive bandage, a vessel, a container, a cistern, a filter, a membrane, a coating, a paint, a solution, a polymer and combinations thereof (Freeman at claim 6). Freeman teaches a deposition method used to treat membranes with dopamine to form polydopamine on the membrane surface and in the case of porous membranes, inside the membrane pores. This method is advantageous over other modifications because of its ease of applicability to virtually any membrane support. Polydopamine nonspecifically adheres to virtually any surface with which it comes into contact (Freeman at [0038]). It would be prima facie obvious to have used the pore size of Tong for the film of Freeman for the benefits of pore size to particle flow taught in Tong. See MPEP 2144. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art have the substrate or the polyurethane of Tong coated with the polydopamine of Freeman for the benefit of the anti-fouling properties disclosed in Freeman. As such, the polydopamine of Freeman would have a similar pore size to that of Tong. A such, the Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive and the obviousness rejection stands.
Conclusion
No claims are presently allowable.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMANDA MICHELLE PETRITSCH whose telephone number is (571)272-6812. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 08:30-17:00 EST ALT Fridays.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Sahana S. Kaup, can be reached at 571-272-6897. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/AMANDA MICHELLE PETRITSCH/Examiner, Art Unit 1612
/SAHANA S KAUP/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1612
